Hmm, interesting. I knew, obviously, that it was against the law for employers to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, but I didn't realize it was against the law to ask the question.

Click to expand...

HR training, IIRC, told us we couldn't ask if people were married, single, anything about orientation, race, religion, ect., when conducting interviews. The married thing usually came up as people make small talk. I really could have cared less what folks did in the bedrooms, so that generally never came up, but I was running a sales staff, and not an NFL locker room.

To the point, there seems to be more interest this season than in the past, if you consider the amount of people talking about this and situations like Manti T'eo's orientation. I don't see what business it is of anyone, anyway. I really could have my head in the sand, but I think this topic is more salaciously media driven than there is a true interest. I am sure there will be players who will say they don't want to play with a gay guy. I also believe there will be players who will look at said individual's ability and be more concerned if the player in question can help them win. If he can, what he does in the bedroom will be irrelevant. The media circus that will no doubt accompany anyone who is out will be another story altogether.

My immediate thought to your post was, 'why wouldn't this be considered worthy of discussion?'

There is a great deal of media coverage about this, there are legal issues and great potential for discriminatory practices connected with questions and behavior like this, etc.

Or, are you trying to say something along the lines of, "I find this a non-issue, don't like this topic and/or I don't want to see it discussed?"

Click to expand...

No, because only one player brought this up and the allegations/circumstances are vague. He was not asked directly whether he was homosexual or hetero.

From the article:

Colorado tight end Nick Kasa told ESPN Radio Denver on Tuesday that he was asked a series of questions that touched on sexual orientation at the just-completed combine in Indianapolis.

"[Teams] ask you like, 'Do you have a girlfriend?' 'Are you married?' 'Do you like girls?' " Kasa said in the radio interview. "Those kinds of things, and you know it was just kind of weird. But they would ask you with a straight face, and it's a pretty weird experience altogether."

Whether a player is married/has a girlfriend are reasonably benign questions. "Do you like girls" would seem borderline, but it's not clear if Kasa is paraphrasing or in what contexts the alleged questions were asked.

From the league:

Any team or employee that inquires about impermissible subjects or makes an employment decision based on such factors is subject to league discipline.

I've always been told by HR that we are not allowed to ask if a potential employee is married. There is a risk of discrimination in the work world - someone who is married can be perceived to be potentially less available or less devoted. This can also be a source of discrimination toward women - obviously somewhat less of an issue here - when the hiring company can consider whether she is a risk to take maternity leave and increase insurance costs. So you are not allowed to ask that.

Yes, asking if "you like girls" is probably strictly illegal under workplace equal rights legislation. Not just NFL rules, and potential sanctions.

Anyone who asks that in an interview is an idiot. These teams should know this. You could potentially see other entities than the NFL raise eyebrows here.

Terrell Suggs was asked a question a few weeks ago on how would he feel if there was a gay man on the team and having to be in the locker room with him and he said he wouldn't have a problem with it as long as he wasn't approached in an unnapropriate manner by that man.

Seems the Baltimore media had a jump start on asking this question just a few weeks before.

Federal Law
Although federal laws protect people from workplace discrimination on the basis of race, national origin, religion, sex, age, and disability, there is no federal law that specifically outlaws workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in the private sector. (Federal government workers are protected from such discrimination.) Attempts to pass federal legislation that would outlaw sexual orientation discrimination in private workplaces have been unsuccessful to date, although more members of Congress support such a bill each year.

State Laws
There is more hope at the state level. Almost half the states and the District of Columbia have laws that currently prohibit sexual orientation discrimination in both public and private jobs: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin.

In addition, a few states have laws prohibiting sexual orientation discrimination in public workplaces only.

I've always been told by HR that we are not allowed to ask if a potential employee is married. There is a risk of discrimination in the work world - someone who is married can be perceived to be potentially less available or less devoted. This can also be a source of discrimination toward women - obviously somewhat less of an issue here - when the hiring company can consider whether she is a risk to take maternity leave and increase insurance costs. So you are not allowed to ask that.

Yes, asking if "you like girls" is probably strictly illegal under workplace equal rights legislation. Not just NFL rules, and potential sanctions.

Anyone who asks that in an interview is an idiot. These teams should know this. You could potentially see other entities than the NFL raise eyebrows here.

Click to expand...

Or, someone who is married/attached can be perceived as more stable and dedicated. Proving illegalities in the employment process is a tough road at best. I can understand why NFL teams would want to push certain boundaries in the process, with millions at stake and idiots like Antonio Cromartie out there.

It all depends on the individual and how solid they seem as a person in general. I doubt that any team would avoid drafting a good player based solely on sexual orientation. It's safe to assume a number of NFL players are gay. (Hello, Richard Sherman?)

Or, someone who is married/attached can be perceived as more stable and dedicated. Proving illegalities in the employment process is a tough road at best. I can understand why NFL teams would want to push certain boundaries in the process, with millions at stake and idiots like Antonio Cromartie out there.

It all depends on the individual and how solid they seem as a person in general. I doubt that any team would avoid drafting a good player based on sexual orientation. It's safe to assume a number of NFL players are gay. (Hello, Richard Sherman?)

Click to expand...

For someone who thought this was a thread that should not have been made,you seem to be quite active in it Tune